^^^ Dunno bout that. Brand recognition plays a huge role, LSD has a market much bigger than psychedelic drug afficionados, and LSD means something to the layman, LSx does not.

That said, I still think 99% of the ergoloids being sold as LSD are in fact, LSD.

What you are saying is totally from someone that has always been a consumer and never been a dealer, or for the case, a sales person.

People, customers, whatever you wanna call it, will believe anything you tell them if you act with enough confidence on the product. Even someone that is a connoisseur still will buy blotters that were not proven LSD, because in the end, everyone wants one thing from this kind of illicit deal - to get high.

It begins with DOCUMENTED PROOF of a GC/MS of what was a VERY LARGE WIDESPREAD run of blotters a couple years ago... originating in Europe, but distributed worldwide, which I myself acquired a sheet of in the US... purported at the time to me as very clean "real" LSD. Which was a BIG FAT LIE!!! And when I did it, BEFORE I SAW THIS, many months ago, I thought, "well pretty pleasant drug, fairly clean feeling, but it does NOT seem like the BEST of the pure LSD I did about 1980-1982.. FAR less visual, FAR less 'sense of awe', and somewhat more bodyload." But I bought into all the hoo-haw being bandied about that "ITs all in your head... set and setting... you are just pining for the good ole days... get over it... ALL LSD IS IN FACT OF NECESSITY PERFECTLY GOOD CLEAN REAL PURE LSD, silly old hippie!" A faith-based wishful-thinking point of view that has, thanks mto SKL's efforts been proven WITH HARD DATA to be bullshit.

GC/MS test was done showing it was NOT LSD... also there are links to journal articles discussing active hallucinogenic ergoloids that are fully active at LSD doses and can fit on blotters. So its not as if these these are not out there. We have PROVEN that they ARE out there, and the print in question was known to be a HUGE run, probably tens if not hundreds of thousands of hits. I see no reason not to assume that it was just the tip of the iceberg.

Just to had something, this same blotters might still being produced.

I saw a A4 sheet of that hoffman / ohm back in end september 2010 @ amsterdam (8 months since last time i have seen them) . Unfortunately couldnt test at the time but interesting to see what would be this batch, new or old. The same person also had plenty alex gray / ganesha .

It's funny that while I concede that the effects of a substance (including LSD) show considerable consistency, and that there are subtle differences between it and this putative LSB/P, the original difference I observed that made me get this blotter GC/MS'ed was entirely due to subjective factors.

That is, due to my focus during the trip and my success or failure in 'letting go', I was getting the inevitable distinction between tense and confusing trips that left me drained and totally clear-minded, energetic and serene trips with a great afterglow.

Subsequently, I had these two kind of trips on the same batch of the same substance (miprocin), but at the time, it happened that those few of the acid trips that went well for me had been on Alex Grey and Rolling Stones acid and all of those in which I had failed to let go were on these Hofmanns, some American WoW and some Hive print tabs.

Hence, I got the idea into my head that there might be another substance on them (which happened to be true, but not for the reasons I thought) and I sent the tabs for testing.

Since then, I've had confirmation that set and setting account for most of the spectrum of variation in psychedelic experiences, and that while it is easy to sense nuances of experience, it can be very tricky to ascribe those nuances correctly to subjective or objective factors.

this is a reasonable explanation but apparently people are convinced by their subjective precision...

I'm also confused by people claiming LSD is some kind of ever-changing totally unpredictable experience; I feel quite strongly the reverse. I have taken it ~50-60 times in the past 10-15 years, and though every experience is unique the central character has always been the same, in the same way that AMT have their own character, etc.

What central character are you referring to? Obviously you feel certain physical effects most times but are you saying that the mental effects are the same every time? And that they'll be the same for every human being on earth every time they take LSD?

There is of course a difference between the specific details of individual trips, and the broad generalizable "Character" of what a drug will do.

Some of the talk about "its always so different" seems to me to be getting hung up on the specifics of individual trips too much.

Yes details will vary, but the same drug will produce the same general type of effects in every person every time. "Mental" effects kinda sounds like it could be infinitely variable, but a certain set of effects on the visual system, which you might call "mental", SHOULD be fairly constant and a set effect of the drug, or not. OPEN EYE VISUALS, such as seeing trails/tracers following movement, "patterning" which is the filling in of areas of solid color with geometric or organic designs/textures ... these are one type of effect that normally characterizes "real" LSD. And in my experience it IS constant with the same batch.

Another class of effects are the physical effects. Does the drug create aches and pains in joints and muscles, nausea, dizzy sensations, weakness, etc. known of course as "body load. The same batch should produce a comparable amount of bodyload with consistency.

A given molecule has a given effect on the brain in a certain way. I just dont go along with the notion that LSD will have this wildly varying random level of these effects with every use. It causes alot of visual effects, especially the open eye visual effects described above. And it causes very LOW levels of "body load." Yes pretty much every time in every person. The times you get a batch with little or no visual effects and alot of body load seem quite obvious a different chemical is somehow involved. Saying "Oh its all just LSD" is bullshit.

Now the details of the CONTENTS of the trip from a psychological, mental, emotional perspective, yes obviously that is going to be different in every person every time.

I disagree. Visuals (OEV and CEV) can be present, absent, intense or mild and bodyfeel also hugely variable from tabs all from the same sheet for me. Even dose doesn't seem to make as much of a difference as I'd expect - have had way more visuals and general psychedelia from a single tab than with three or four from the same sheet (and vice versa) frequently. The tabs in question have often been laid by somebody I know (and yes they do know what they are doing I can assure you) and tested in the Netherlands meaning they are shown to be acid and the ug dose per tab is also known.

Acid is different every time for me in pretty much every way. Of course acid had a unique character, but it is a character with a very, very wide range of effects indeed. I still don't doubt that these LS? tabs likely exist, but I also still believe them to be extremely rare cos otherwise they would be being flagged up through testing cos the majority of tabs (certainly those that I come across) in European circulation tend to be tested so substance and dose per tab is known - actually tested independently rather than subjectively judged.

I have also had "super-variable" experiences on LSD, and not just on LSD, but on a great variety of other drugs as well ...

I remain convinced that "L-alike" analogues have circulated and continue to circulate on a relatively small scale. However, to attribute any and all variation in the characteristics of an LSD experience to the presence of different chemicals is not reasonable. LSD has a dizzyingly wide range of possible effects across various dimensions, for instance, at similar doses I have had experiences that were highly visual or almost entirely devoid of visuals, on exactly the same material. I would also bet that there is a lot of variation in the effects of the analogues.

Not only is ergoloid pharmacology dizzyingly complex but the nature of the psychedelic experience means that psychological and environmental factors can be just as important in determine the qualitative nature of the experience as pharmacological ones. Analogues and/or impurities probably account for only a small percentage of the variation in subjective effects between different experiences. Actually as I've said before I bet that many people could not distinguish between close analogues in a blind taste test. Subjective experiences are going to get us nowhere in learning more about the analogue-on-blotter question. The only thing that is going to settle this is more hard data and more definitive hard data, which hopefully will be forthcoming in the near future.

Yes details will vary, but the same drug will produce the same general type of effects in every person every time.
...

A given molecule has a given effect on the brain in a certain way. I just dont go along with the notion that LSD will have this wildly varying random level of these effects with every use.

I agree that substances have the same TYPE of effects. For example, LSD visuals for me are always open-eye moving fractal patterns without much color enhancement, static deformation of objects and organic patterns in textures. Closed eye visuals are fluid, moving organic patterns and objects in solid, clearly delineated colors, akin to computer graphics. Likewise, the nature of the bodyload is very consistent and feels like tension to the point of being afraid I'll pop an artery in my brain.

But the LEVEL does vary immensely. I've had trips on three tabs with no visuals whatsoever and huge tension-induced bodyload and one-tab trips from the same sheet with clear visuals and a clear mind space. I've also had trips with no visuals until the end, when I finally managed to let go and visuals literally popped out of the woodwork. Likewise for all psychedelic substances I've tried.

And these differences may seem RANDOM, and indeed they seemed like this to me in the beginning, but as I grew to know myself better and to gain experience with psychedelics, I noticed that they are strongly correlated with my set, setting and conduct during the trip. If these are fairly constant for you and you are a well balanced person, I wouldn't be surprised if trips were very consistent for you. But this isn't the case for me and probably for many others.

The best explanation for this phenomenon I can come up this is that it is a simple matter of focus. When I am focused on my thoughts and concerns, this occupies most of my field of attention, working memory and 'processing power' and mutes down input from the outside world. Indeed, when I'm in introspective mode, I usually feel derealized and dissociated from the outside world.

When I 'let go' of my train of thought (which can be an extremely difficult thing, because oftentimes it seems of vital importance during a trip) my working memory clears, I go through something akin to a mini-sleep and I feel like a huge weight has been taken off my shoulders. I feel reborn, free and cleansed. The body load goes away, leaving me full of energy and the outside world comes flooding in through my sensory channels, including the rich visuals that before had been inhibited.

I've experienced this transition clearly, sometimes repeatedly, during trips. And this is what I meant by variation due to subjective factors, a variation which is fairly consistent across all psychedelics, and which I've learned to tell apart from the differences between individual substances, which are very consistent in themselves.

Elsewhere I have read posts going on at length about all sorts of variations in non-lsd ergoloids that would seem to me to sort of imply that there is alot more variability in "acid chemistry" than you and others keep arguing.

"...to attribute any and all variation in the characteristics of an LSD experience to the presence of different chemicals is not reasonable."

Of course "any and all variation" is not due to the substance(s). Every trip will have a different detailed set of experiences, thought and feelings. But phrasing it that way puts the focus on those fine details, which is muddling the issue.

is also not reasonable. Never happened to me when I had a quantity on hand. Same batch always tended to do pretty much same thing. I cant comprehend where you guys are coming from claiming this. It is very much at odds with my experience, and that of others I know, and does not make pharmacological sense.

It keeps being repeated, but I feel it is an extraordinary claim. Perhaps I have an extraordinary brain that responds in a far higher consistency than yours does, I dunno.

But anyway, good discussion, I feel we are getting down to the nitty-gritty of the "different effects" aspects of the inquiry. Well sort of. Seems difficult to ever really quantify such things when a trip can last for such a long time and contain so many separate "momentary impression units."

And these differences may seem RANDOM, and indeed they seemed like this to me in the beginning, but as I grew to know myself better and to gain experience with psychedelics, I noticed that they are strongly correlated with my set, setting and conduct during the trip. If these are fairly constant for you and you are a well balanced person, I wouldn't be surprised if trips were very consistent for you. But this isn't the case for me and probably for many others.

Bingo.

Totally agree that the "random" variation between trips seems far less random if you look back and consider the wider context at the time. Set and setting totally explains all the differences between all the trips I've had, in my opinion. A simple example - at an EADD meet at a psytrance night a while back I took 500ug of acid and had one of the most recreational, visual and euphoric LSD experiences of my life with the "classic" electric energy bodyfeel.

Some weeks later at home alone I took the same dose of the same tabs and the trip was analytical, emotional and almost devoid of visuals with a fairly uncomfortable bodyfeel and little or no energy boost. Totally different trips with adjacent tabs from the same sheet.

Obviously the setting and set were very different and the experience fitted in with said S&S. As far as I'm concerned the extraordinarily wide range of more subtle variations during all my other LSD experiences is entirely down to the more subtle variations in S&S as it changes constantly from minute to minute, day to day. I remain convinced that I have never come across anything sold as LSD that wasn't LSD. I'm not saying that is the case for everybody but I strongly suspect it is the case for the vast majority of people.

is also not reasonable. Never happened to me when I had a quantity on hand. Same batch always tended to do pretty much same thing. I cant comprehend where you guys are coming from claiming this. It is very much at odds with my experience, and that of others I know, and does not make pharmacological sense.

You keep saying it over and over but I feel it is an extraordinary claim. Perhaps I have an extraordinary brain that responds in a far higher consistency than yours does, I dunno.

But anyway, good discussion, I feel we are getting down to the nitty-gritty of the "different effects" aspects of the inquiry. Well sort of. Seems difficult to ever really quantify such things when a trip can last for such a long time and contain so many separate "momentary impression units."

Well, I have definitely experienced this sort of variation with tbe exact same material. Less so as regards the bodily effects, but with regards to the sensory and psychological effects the potential for variation is extreme. I've also experienced similar variability with a wide swath of drugs, not all of which are psychedelic. Set, setting, and other intrinsic factors (balances of neurotransmitters, whatever) are enormously powerful in determining the qualitative nature of the experience. The pharmacology of psychedelics and of the ergoloids in particular is hugely complex and interacts in a very subtle manner with an immeasurable number of variables in our brain, and the psychological effects also immeasurably complex and interacting in a very subltle manner with an immeasurable number of variables in our mind, if you will permit, arguendo, my unabashed dualism of brain and mind for the moment.

It is obvious that different drugs have different effects on the mind/brain due to their different pharmacological properties. However, there have been studies done in which subjects were unable to distinguish between LSD and 4-HO-DMT, not to mention the study in which people were given a high or a low dose of LSD and told the opposite, and they tended to react more in the manner of what they were told rather than what they were given. I find this exceedingly hard to believe, I think there are problems with these studies and I'm quite sure I could differentiate between LSD and 4-HO-DMT, but they all go to show that not all the determinants of the psychedelic state are pharmacological.

I think to deny the possibility that psychedelics have potentially hugely variegated effects actually downplays how complex and fascinating they actually are. The pharmacology is infinitely more complex than just metaphorically turning the drug effect on and off like a lightswitch. The possibilities truly are endless.

I would even venture to say that the amount of subjective variability possible between 2 LSD experiences does, in fact, approach or perhaps even exceed the subjective variability between closely related but different drugs. The pharmacology here is incredibly complex and nothing is simple or black and white.

I am very interested in studying subjective differences between psychedelics and this is a large part of what I hope to do with the Esoteric Pharmacology Project; however, I am quite doubtful that in a double blind type setting (such as buying a blotter of unknown provenance off most dealers ) most people could distinguish between closely relates drugs ... However, the specific effects of the putative non-diethyl lysergamides in man are relatively unknown and most of what we have about them is speculative at best.

...yet this has been my experience many times (except it isn't totally random as some have pointed out).

But it shouldn't be too hard to test out in practice:

1) Assemble a group of people who claim to feel the difference between LSD and the alleged analog.
2) Dose them randomly with one or the other.
3) Ask which one they think they're on and compare results.

^ Go to any large music festival in the U.S. and ask the older hippies about the differences between white fluff, silver, amber, etc ... You'll hear a lot of very lively discussion and assured distinctions ... All of which are total crap, placebo effect vs. marketing hype.

Now, I do believe that (a) some impurities in LSD, particularly as regards diethylamine being incompletely distilled, exist, are little studied, and have potential effects, and (b) that other lysergamides have circulated.

But the vast majority of the subjective differences between LSD experiences are in all probability due to non-pharmacological factors.

... Less so as regards the bodily effects, but with regards to the sensory and psychological effects the potential for variation is extreme...

The changes in bodyfeel did strike me as being more strange than the mental/emotional differences but - for me at least - I think S&S also covers that. In the example I gave above the second trip involved a level of discomfort (not extreme by any means but noticeable and occasionally irksome) but it was very much an emotional clear-out style trip. It seems to me that the bodily sensations were likely due to emotional tensions made physical as I worked through various things. I'd see it as probably another aspect of S&S that is less ubiquitous than the changes apparent in other aspects of trips. I could also quite believe that certain impurities will likely play a role fairly frequently - stomach cramps seem to be one such symptom which certain batches are frequently associated with by many people. In such cases when individual variation is narrow and reports of a specific effect are wide I'd suspect contamination of some sort. Probably strychnine

Interesting studies you mention there. There have been a number of such things (the famous example of identical doses of LSD given in different coloured tabs producing totally different subjective effects leaps to mind) and I think that taken together they certainly add a lotta weight to the theory that S&S is likely the predominant factor in the dramatic differences between experiences of the exact same dose and substance.

I was referring to subjective differences between different experiences experienced by the same individual ... Now, the problems of communicating very subjective things and comparing the reports of different individuals is an entirely different and even more complicated matter! So many dimensions to this...

I think the ability to discriminate between two totally different psychedelics will depend alot on the amount of experience possessed by the subject.

I am 100% certain that if you gave me a dose of LSD one day and a dose of some tryptamine RC or some 2C another day I could tell you with 100 percent accuracy which was which. The accuracy of identifying WHICH tryptamine might be a little less, but again that improves with experience, kind of like facial recognition. For instance I am so extremely familar with the very specific pattern of effects of 4-aco-dipt that I am certain I could identify it precisely no matter what. Same with Methylone. Same with 2C-I. Others that I have less experience with, I won't have learned the pattern as well, so identification will be less accurate.

You are right so far as varying visual effects to a degree, but I have always found that one element - the strength and qualities of the "visual tracer" effect is a telltale giveaway and is always quite regular and identifiable, at least for me, but perhaps I have mentally focused on that effect more intensely than others might have. It seems like a rather mechanical effect of the impact of the LSD (or 2C-I, the other one that creates a very reliable tracer effect in me) on the visual cortex. Seems like a very mechanical process, not subject to alot of influence from shifting emotional landscapes.

"Body Load" also seems to me to have been pretty consistent and not changing alot, again, at least for me. A given drug, or a given batch of LSD always seems to me to have a quite distinctive and regular pattern of physical activity side-effects. So I dunno, perhaps there are those people for whom these things ARE more regular and stable, and other people tend to have much less fixed responses. Different TYPES of "responders". Perhaps that is another element at the root of all these disagreements, people assuming that everyone has the same sort of reaction profiles that they do when in fact, each person's system might respond differently, in general, and specifically to different chemicals. So comparing reactions between different people may well be next to useless. But WITHIN ONE PERSON, who feels that his responses are quite stable and predictable, it seems reasonable to me that one could learn these things better and with finer precision than another might. So to make a blanket assertion that "Because *I* have highly variable reactions and cant tell A from B, therefore YOU must be making up this 'ability to discern' " seems to me not proper.

And the apocryphal tale of Owsley's experiment of making different colored blotters and laughing at all the different hugely varied reactions, I give zero veracity to that. That ONE story has been getting repeated over and over so its part of the "LSD canon", and it's an amusing anecdote , but I don't consider it a valid reliable data point at all. For all we know that could have originated because he wanted to make a point to someone in an argument (like this one) and just made that whole thing up, there is no proof of any kind that it actually occurred, it's just an oft-repeated fable so far as I am concerned, and the returned "data", oral reports in Owsley's memory, would be equally inadmissible.

And the apocryphal tale of Owsley's experiment of making different colored blotters and laughing at all the different hugely varied reactions, I give zero veracity to that. That ONE story has been getting repeated over and over so its part of the "LSD canon", and it's an amusing anecdote , but I don't consider it a valid reliable data point at all. For all we know that could have originated because he wanted to make a point to someone in an argument (like this one) and just made that whole thing up, there is no proof of any kind that it actually occurred, it's just an oft-repeated fable so far as I am concerned, and the returned "data", oral reports in Owsley's memory, would be equally inadmissible.

it just seems contradictory to me that you aren't willing to take this anecdote as serious evidence but you are willing to consider the anecdotal reports of people who purport that they can tell they took something on blotters that "wasn't LSD" with absolutely no controls or scientific basis

it seems like you just want to believe what you want to believe and you're willing to make arguments against people that apply to your very own (rather poor) body of evidence

it just seems contradictory to me that you aren't willing to take this anecdote as serious evidence but you are willing to consider the anecdotal reports of people who purport that they can tell they took something on blotters that "wasn't LSD" with absolutely no controls or scientific basis

it seems like you just want to believe what you want to believe and you're willing to make arguments against people that apply to your very own (rather poor) body of evidence

^^^ Are they? Seems to me they are the same thing.....(I can't see a way to measure or quantify either). Regardless, the point stands. Look at all the hoo-ha surrounding Acid, as has been pointed out repeatedly, most recently with SKL's comment on "fluff" , "silver", etc. I have seen several times the same LSD, at the same concentration, laid out on different blotter prints get drastically differing review once it makes its way to the consumer. And hilariously differing approximations on dosage filter back up as well (this stuff only has 50mcg per hit, whereas this stuff has 120-150mcg, etc etc....all the same), just pointing to the power of set, setting, and suggestion. LSD is an intensely malleable beast, this I can say with certainty.

SomeKindaLove - Your position and approach is admirable and quite refreshing. Nice to see someone bring up a subject, and not get so personally attached so as to throw reason out the window and doggedly insist. Props sir! Great thread, has made for some good conversatin'

Hmm....... It seems to me that LSD is the only substance that people have these problems with. I believe that, while maybe set, setting, impurities may have something to do with it, the main thing is that LSD is sort of like an ever-changing chameleon. Maybe the age of the batch has something to do with it, too? how much heat it's had since laying? Maybe LSD is just different than other drugs. I certainly think so. I'm not saying that there aren't other things being put on tabs, but I did a lot of acid from the same source and had different experiences. But green gellies acted like green gellies. Blue likew blue. Purple like purple. Anyone else had those red ones that were going around Philadelphia in 1998? I had fun with them, but a friend said he tripped for 22 hours on one geltab!!!!! I certainly didn't experience that, and the hit was from my sheet. I gave it to him. What you expect from the trip changes what you get out of it. Period. LSD is LSD is LSD is a weird drug.

it just seems contradictory to me that you aren't willing to take this anecdote as serious evidence but you are willing to consider the anecdotal reports of people who purport that they can tell they took something on blotters that "wasn't LSD" with absolutely no controls or scientific basis

it seems like you just want to believe what you want to believe and you're willing to make arguments against people that apply to your very own (rather poor) body of evidence

Quit putting words in my mouth, you are erecting a strawman.

I am choosing to believe my own experience and that of people I know personally any have tripped with. Not some legion of people posting somewhere.

"The Anecdote" is from many decades in the past far far away from me, related tenth-hand, supposedly told by a notorious PRODUCER of LSD blotters, with a known reputation for being a "character," with many reasons to NOT be telling the truth, to some unknown person who then passed it on to someone who passed it on etc. until it is not the story we hear today. I dunno maybe its in a book he or someone wrote or something.

It's odd that you believe this verbal mythical story from the distant past, and not the experiences of myself and other real people I know live today.

I am not saying I believe the different trips, specifically the bad trips with no visuals and horrible bodyload, were "not lsd" necessarily, but at least possibly lsd with some contaminants which, while possibly not active on their own, in the presence of LSD managed to alter its effects in some way as to make it primarily a bad body load thing and not a sublime mental trip thing.

And saying you expect "controls" and "scientific basis" is also absurd. Controls? Babe, this is NOT a government sponsored research study. The whole thing comes down to actual tests performed on 0.00000000001% of all batches ever produced, some of which HAVE by the way proven the presence of OTHER stuff, versus the actual reports of actual humans in far larger numbers than these tests.... neither of these data sources have any statistical controls whatsoever, so STFU about THAT!

Also, I am not wanting to be absolutist about this... I do agree as averagetool says "LSD is a weird drug" and that different people can well have all sorts of wacky different experiences on it.

By my point is that reports from MYSELF and others I know well personally bear out that this attempt to convince us that the "lousy acid" we come across from time to time, no visuals, no 'sense of awe", lots of icky body load is EXACTLY the same drug as "the good clean trippy stuff" does not have as much validity and "scientific" support as its proponents are trying to claim. Its all based on very scant actual data, and alot of abstract reasoning.

Comparisons between different people in different situations, not so useful I agree.

But reports from people, serious intelligent explorers not "random party kids", with lots of experience doing different batches in essentially THE SAME set & setting, and experiencing these vastly different effect sets should be taken seriously as signs of probable different substances, not cavalierly dismissed as nothing. There is alot more bunk going around than the proponents of this ITS ALL ALWAYS PURE LSD, ITS ALL ALWAYS PURE LSD, ITS ALL ALWAYS PURE LSD mantra are trying so hard to convince everyone to believe.

I tripped a lot in the late 1990's when LSD was prevalent in America, and I will say this: real LSD (1) lasts a good 12 hours every time, and (2) gives terrible anxiety everytime.

I silently scoff at young ones who claim, "Oh yeah, I've taken LSD. It's a very mellow trip." This is not correct! Real LSD is anxiogenic and lasts a solid 12 hours every time. It is also prone to induce bouts of emotional lability in its users.